memory_betafandomcom-20200223-history
User talk:Jdvelasc
--The Doctor 09:13, 26 November 2006 (UTC) Image size Hey (-:. I just wanted to leave a note about image size. Although the standard size of images is either 250px or 200px, it has been decided that if we only have a poor quality image which is quite small, then leave the image at the correct size, so it doesn't appear stretched and blurry. Anyway, thanks for the great contributions you've made recently, and I hope we see many more. (-: --The Doctor 13:39, 7 March 2007 (UTC) :Thank you for the message. In general, I am a big fan of standardizing pages, but in this case I agree. I will try to go back through any pages that I have added less than stellar images for and resize them appropriately. (And of course keep my eye out for other such pages.) It is often difficult to tell whether an image will really work at 250px or not though. Does anyone know of a site that generally contains good pictures of the novel covers? (what I care about most) It would seem that there must be good databases out there and uploading the images is something relatively easy to do and it makes a big difference to the book page. Thanks. Jdvelasc 16:50, 7 March 2007 (UTC) ::There isn't really one site that has a complete collection, psi-phi has some good quality ones. The most complete collection is The Complete Starfleet Library, however they are all small. Amazon can often be a good source, but some of their images have copyright marks all over them which we don't want. My best and almost always successful way to get a good cover is to just do a google image search for the title. -- 8of5 20:53, 22 March 2007 (UTC) Novel pages No problem (-: Before the changeover to MediaWiki 1.9 when entering a topic into the bar it was instantly display as Forum:Whatever, but no it doesn't. I can't explain it, maybe another bug such as the one discovered with the templates yesterday. -- 20:15, 22 March 2007 (UTC) Re:Psychonaut I'm affraid if one of us isn't online there's not much we can do. Yourself The doctor and I seem to have cleaned everything up now :) -- 8of5 04:54, 8 April 2007 (UTC) Time for... Jdvelasc, I just checked out your edits to A Time for War, A Time for Peace. It looks great! I would argue that it should be given the header "synopsis," rather than "summary," but I think it is very readable, and incorporates a level of detail that people would hope to find on these articles. -- Data Noh 15:38, 15 May 2007 (UTC) Bartel Hello Jdvelasc in relics the novelisation on pg 94 it says kerry bartel emma to my knowledge wasnt mentioned in the novel but havent seen her mentioned in any book that i own or read but don't forget there is a lot of discrepancies between the episode and novel. hope that clear that it up Mchenry 17: 25, 15 May 2007 (2007) Re:SCEs Hi, glad you likes for the most part. I reasoned that as the template is already set as an omnibus the numbering would indicate it's omnibus number whatever. --8of5 18:39, 15 June 2007 (UTC) Copyright templates Hi, are you sure about changing the copyright template on covers from the one specifically saying paramount owns them to the open ended version? I'm pretty sure the covers are just as much property of CBS/Paramount as the contents. --8of5 16:43, 9 July 2007 (UTC) :Nope, I am not at all sure. I tried to ask here back in May Talk:Non-canon Star Trek Wiki:Image use policy before I started to organize all of the cover image files, but obviously I should have asked in a forum or some other better place. Memory Alpha has "fair use" on a lot of their covers and Wikipedia has a special book cover template. Our Project:Image use policy page (copied from Memory Alpha) seems to indicate that covers are available for display just about anywhere (for review purposes) and that makes a lot of sense to me. Of course we could still use the paramount template if paramount does actually own the copyright on the covers, but it isn't clear that they do. :As another issue, the copyright on original artwork, like covers without titles, might be held by the artist themselves (in which case the cover art might as well). I am sure this is going to depend on the actual contract held between book publishers and artists. I have no idea what is standard for books, but I know that it comics it varies by the publisher whether they still hold ownership over their artwork and so copyright might work the same way. :My procedure for the past few months has been to use fair use templates on covers and leave paramount templates on episode images. What do you think we should do? --Jdvelasc 17:06, 9 July 2007 (UTC) ::Copyright is far from area of expertise, so I wouldn't hold anything I say in very high regard. My approach has generally been to think if there is something from Star Trek on it, CBS/paramount owns it. I obviously don’t know the details of contracts either, but an artist isn’t going to be working on a Star Trek product unless CBS or the licensor has instructed them to do so, so I'd imagine anything they output for that project then becomes CBS's. ::On the talk pages, yup they get ignored a lot unfortunately, if the community doesn't engage I guess it's up to the individual to hope they make the best judgement. The only difference between the templates seems to be that one specifies paramount, so they probably function pretty much the same. --8of5 17:18, 9 July 2007 (UTC) ::Thanks for saying something. I think what I will do for now is to continue using the "fair use" template since I think that should use even if Paramount does own the copyright. I will also start a forum to see if anyone who knows better has some other advice. --Jdvelasc 18:11, 9 July 2007 (UTC) Mega move Hi (-:. The "mega move" is something that we've been sort of working on for about a year now. Shortly after 8of5 and I became administrators last July we planned on moving the project to the Memory Beta namespace when we changed the wiki name. Unfortunately, I underestimated the process that we needed to carry out and unfortunately even though our project pages begin with Memory Beta, they should all still have Non-canon Star Trek Wiki in-front. So all the MB pages need to be moved back, so that the tech people can move the namespace to MB. --Dr. John Smith 20:00, 4 August 2007 (UTC) :I would be happy to help, but I do not understand exactly what needs to be done. Is it correct that every page that begins "Memory Beta:" should be moved to the same title but instead of MB it should be prefixed by "Non-canon Star Trek Wiki:"? I can move those pages (I think - do you need to be an administrator?), but I would not be able to delete the redirects that would form afterwards. It looks like you are also changing links to MB pages in other pages and replacing the prefix with "Project:" Does this automatically link to whatever project name we have? So right now it links to "Non-canon Star Trek Wiki:..." but when the namespace moves then it will link to "Memory Beta:..."? :By the way, if you think that I would just be more likely to get in the way of everything, please say so. There are certainly plenty of other things I can be doing on the wiki. --Jdvelasc 20:33, 4 August 2007 (UTC) ::Ah yes, I remember that I moved that article, but then decided to leave moving the deletion pages around until all the other pages were taken care of, because when I moved the page to the Non-canon Star Trek Wiki namespace, the link didn't appear on the Votes for deletion page. --Dr. John Smith 23:24, 17 August 2007 (UTC) ::Well, per my last post here, I don't think its necessary to move these archived discussions, rather delete them and move the current deletion discussions. --Dr. John Smith 23:30, 17 August 2007 (UTC) Chronology Hi Jdvelasc, don't forget when you add chronology placements to stories to also put those stories in said places on the chronology and to adjust the now and next boxes of the adjoining stories accordingly. --8of5 22:24, 8 August 2007 (UTC) : Right - I had planned on doing that but I was out of time just then. But thanks for reminding me. It would have been easy to forget. --Jdvelasc 02:49, 9 August 2007 (UTC) Links Hi, I don’t think linking to pages detailing the entire monthly series for each comic is particularly useful, one the link isn't specific to the page you are linking it from and even then the data on said linked page is already covered on the comic's page here. --8of5 02:05, 13 August 2007 (UTC) :Responding on each other's talk page makes the little you have a message thing pop up which expatiates things. If you aren’t in a hurry, replying on the same page should work too, the other person in the correspondence just has to spot you have in the recent changes list. :I was referring to the external links you've been adding to pages on the Star Trek comics check list. Whilst a link to that page might be useful on the DC TNG series page, a link to it from each comic isn't so much because the page you link to is about the whole series not any specific comic. --8of5 02:18, 13 August 2007 (UTC) ::Ah yes, that makes sense. I definitely think that is a very useful site given that we don't have a lot of info on most comics yet, but over time, we should eventually have much more info than is on that page. It would be nice to somehow be working together. And I agree that there isn't much reason to link to that page from each individual comic's page. Do you feel the same way about linking to Memory Alpha pages when our page has just as much info as theirs? Linking there as much as possible seems like a good idea to me since they will likely always have far more information on lots of subjects than us and so if our goal is just providing info on the Star Trek universe, we should be happy to have people browsing around MA as well. (Now we need their pages to link to ours all the time). --Jdvelasc 03:36, 13 August 2007 (UTC) Admin status Congratulations, you are now an admin here at Memory Beta. Well done (-: --Dr. John Smith 02:07, 14 August 2007 (UTC) Image Uploads I'm sure that you knew this already, but on an initial image upload, you can put the description (license, category, etc) text into the "description field" rather than editing the image immediately afterward with that data. It just might save you a few minutes of re-editing along the way. :) -- Sulfur 15:49, 20 August 2007 (UTC) :Yes, I did know that, but there are plenty of things I don't know so please continue to let me know if it looks like I am doing something weird. I have written the text in the description sometimes, but you can't preview the page and sometimes I am worried that I don't have the exact category name, etc. I guess it is one less edit if I get it right, but it certainly doesn't save any time. Also, it looks weird on the recent changes page which I look at all the time. --Jdvelasc 18:09, 20 August 2007 (UTC) Namespaces Thanks for pointing out the namespace issue. It's fixed now. Angela (talk) 23:57, 20 August 2007 (UTC) Image size Just to let you know that after a prolonged stand-off between 8of5 and myself regarding the size of images, we have compromised and decided that all images (barring thumbnails) will be displayed at 220px, rather than 200px or 250px. (-: --Dr. John Smith 22:27, 22 August 2007 (UTC) :Re the doc's talk page: Good idea, I've considered it myself. Unfortunately it would be quite an undertaking. For the collected comics and novels template you only put in the file name and it sizes the image automatically. But for the normal comic and novels templates you have to put in the square brackets and image size. If we were to switch the templates to automatic sizing we would have to alter every single page that uses them. Which is at least several hundred pages. :Of course we have to do that anyway to make them all 220, but that can be done gradually over time. If we changed the template we’d want to make the change immediately to all effected pages to avoid messing up half the pages on the site. --8of5 04:52, 23 August 2007 (UTC) Re: Links Thanks for fixing the links. It's not my fault that TOS comics tended to "exclamize" alot of their titles. Also, when I was copy-and-pasting 40+ titles at a time, I didn't always check to make sure that they all went to the appropriate place. (I know my userpage edits aren't helping out the site any, I'm just messing around with the idea of "relaunches.")--Tim Thomason 23:44, 22 August 2007 (UTC) Deletion templates Hi. Just a brief note that the correct template to use for image deletion is . The templates had to be separated out so that the correct delete discussion page can be loaded. Thanks (-: --Dr. John Smith 06:46, 18 September 2007 (UTC) Problem Reports Hi. I wasn't aware of this new problem reports system as I've been a bit out of the loop recently. Anyway, I'm guessing that the problems are reported by the Report problem tab at the top of all pages, that must then send the reports to that page. With regards to removing the author's location, I suppose it does no harm, because it could have been the author who suggested its removal, however, it could be equally likely that the piece of information was incorrect. All-in-all I suppose it wasn't an important piece of information, so its removal doesn't detract from the article as a whole. --Dr. John Smith 08:06, 12 October 2007 (UTC) Problem Report for BoP Hi, I'm sorry I'm putting this on your userpage, but I'm the guy who reported a problem on the... bird of prey thing page. I was just testing the button. OK? --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Your welcome. From the report guy ;) The Kebron Pic The Zak Kebron Pic was from either Line of Fire or Survival. I'll check when I get home tomorrow evening. – Turtletrekker 05:18, 21 October 2007 (UTC) AT2 Howell Sorry, but I didn't know where to send the response. You wrote: :Sorry I didn't notice your questions about moving pages earlier. I see that you have moved "Light of Day" to "Light of the Day". Where does your information about this title come from? Memory Alpha also lists "Light of Day" as the title. --Jdvelasc 03:59, 4 November 2007 (UTC) I was looking at the comic the night I typed it in. The title is on the inside of the cover. :Also, was there a problem with the title of the "PHI-11" page? Perhaps you wanted the title to be "Phi-11"? I am not sure as I haven't seen the comic. --Jdvelasc 04:05, 4 November 2007 (UTC) The comic is in all CAPS. I had first entered the page as PHI-11, only to learn there was another page marked Phi-11. Thanks for going to bat for me. I'm Navy, so unfortunately my writing tends to be direct, strait to the information, and with little else. I haven't written much since college. ---- AT2 Howell I think they're going to try and ban me in the near future. – AT2Howell 15:00, 11 August 2008 (UTC) Congratulations Congratulations on the baby!!! Don't worry about the POTD section, now I'm back I'll be taking care of all of the main page sections which have been somewhat neglected lately. --Dr. John Smith 17:42, 4 December 2007 (UTC) Thanks! Thanks for the welcome back. Life got a little crazy there for a while for me... something you can probably understand with your newborn (congrats by the way). Hope to be active again for a while. -- Data Noh 15:40, 18 December 2007 (UTC) "MwT&D" stardate It's the stardate given on the Enterprise-D dedication plaque for the ship's commissioning-- as the story takes place at that very moment! Not conclusive, I know, but pretty dang near it. --Steve 18:17, 18 February 2008 (UTC) a situation Hello, I'm dropping you a line because I'm running into a roadblock as an administrator, one that I feel could use help from other administrators because it is getting out of hand and seems to be a problem that only I have. user:seventy has been abusive and rude to me since February 2007 -- as a new user I created some articles that he didn't like, and he began a tirade against me when I asked that he discuss it with me and recommended that new users get communication regarding problems with their articles rather than rudeness. Since then, I feel his contributions have been appreciable, and fairly well-rounded -- although when the community makes suggestions to him, he gets defensive. I'm starting to think that he only gets really rude when I personally deal with him, however, so I'm asking for guidance for what to do next. As an admin, I'm supposed to make suggestions about articles that need cleanup and changes based on site policy, which all users are welcome to suggest changes to. But as a person, I feel like I can no longer deal with his terrible attitude after being continuously insulted by him. Please keep this in mind in case I call on other admins to come between our discussions. -- Captain MKB 02:32, 23 August 2008 (UTC) Global Taxonomy Hi there! I'm happy to introduce to you the new feature called the Global Taxonomy. This formula accumulates wikis a user visits and generates a list of recommended wikis for them to visit. In other words, people who have an interest in a topic or genre you entail will be recommended a chance to visit this wiki! That will be perfect for garnering visitors here. You can read more about it on the blog, plus if you're interested in template use, you can check out this link, too. Hope you find them helpful! The Silver wings of Night (talk) 22:10, December 1, 2019 (UTC) End of the Year Hi there! Quick update on FANDOM's end-of-the-year term. First, there will be changes with featured videos: as of the end of this December, "Featured" Video will be receiving some trial run experiments in hopes of improving its quality, reasons being that videos featured on a page tend to be outdated or spout all the information the user can already read on the article. The main goal will be to figure out how to complement wiki content. Because of that, you might receive a video called "The Loop" play for anonymous users, that will be meant purely to collect visitation data in vein of the Global Taxonomy method. It won't affect all users, so you might not notice. But if you want to learn more, you can go to the blog post. For more info on Fandom's year in review, you can check out the community post. Let me know if you have any questions, and happy holidays! The Silver wings of Night (talk) 18:53, December 21, 2019 (UTC)